Looking at it, there probably is room for Nnamdi still, but with Russell, Kelly, and now Walker all with what I believe has to be top 3-5 positional money and Harris and Fargas up there as well, it will be getting tight. Plus Morrison and Howard and Burgess will all probably be looking for new deals soon too.

If you can just put the dollars aside for a second though, I guess at least the Raiders are trying to do something. Call me crazy, but IMO the only thing worse than paying $55M to an injury prone WR is starting the season with no one but an aging and injury prone Curry and a 2nd year TE in Zach Miller for Russell to throw to. It's a lot of money, sure, but at least there's a chance Walker and Russell could really do some damage. It will hurt if it doesn't work out, but I guess at least this is a potentially high reward risk. I mean, for the money, the Berrian signing's potential pay off seems considerably less.

Although it's easier to see that positive angle as a fan of another team as I wouldn't and didn't want the Titans to take this approach for Young.

I can't imagine that Oakland feels comfortable going into the season with Harris at left tackle, so I'm hoping that isn't the end of the offensive tackle additions. The Walker deal is monstrous, more so than it should be, but I like the concept of the move.

The nice thing about all these contracts Oakland is handing out being front loaded is that it probably doesn't hurt a long term deal for Asomugha and it should limit the cap penalties the Raiders have to deal with down the line.

Ouch... Kwame plays far too upright, he lunges, and it seems almost impossible for him to actually engage the defender.

I was ok with the Kwame Harris signing as long as it was at close to league minimum and no signing bonus. Perhaps incentive laden if he actually plays and performs. But $5 million per year? YIKES! For that piece of crap?

I thought Walker was fantastic in 2006 though. He was the Broncos offense that season.

If he can play in that form, that will be big for the Raiders.

And that's why I was ok with the Raiders pursuing Walker in the first place. I personally saw Walker tear up defenses single-handedly in 2006. And in 2004 for the Packers. But at this amount of money? He'd better show that he can be even better than his 2006 numbers.

And the Raiders had better hope that the cap truly gets nullified after this season otherwise they will be in cap hell. I think that's what Davis is banking on with these contracts though. (or maybe I hope...)

The Raiders have moved ahead of the Chiefs in the division for the short term but in the long run the Chiefs are actually building through the draft which is something Oakland refuses to do. Oakland will be better this year but in the long run they are doing nothing but signing older veterans to huge contracts that are going to hurt them.

Wow that's an even bigger deal for Walker than the one he got from Denver. If he's healthy he's gonna be a big help to Jamarcus but this guy has some great luck. Both times he's injured/has a bad year he gets a huge contract from the Broncos and now the Raiders. He will still be on the Broncos pay roll too.

The Raiders have moved ahead of the Chiefs in the division for the short term but in the long run the Chiefs are actually building through the draft which is something Oakland refuses to do. Oakland will be better this year but in the long run they are doing nothing but signing older veterans to huge contracts that are going to hurt them.

I wouldn't say that they are "older veterans". They are veterans, yes, but not really on the old side--Javon Walker is the oldest and he's only 29. Wilson is 26, Kelly just turned 27, Kwame Harris is not quite 27. Let's not paint this like the FA signings of 2000-2002 when they added Rod Woodson, John Parrella, Trace Armstrong, Bill Romanowski and Jerry Rice at the end of their careers.

That said, they are banking on a lot of things going right--Wilson to continue to build off of his performance on the end season and postseason, Kelly and Walker to come back from injury, Walker to return to his game breaking form of 2004 and 2006 on top of his needed recovery, Kelly to actually realize his potential as a UT (so many players have praised him for his potential), and for Kwame Harris to look like anything but the crap that he's looked the last 4 years, to actually live up to his potential and tools that got him drafted #4 overall in 2003.

And if these things don't happen, the Raiders will be totally screwed. If the NFL actually gets rid of salary cap, they won't be that screwed though.

The salary cap may not be here for 2010-2011, but I don't see how it goes for good. Too many owners would want it on any new CBA.

I truly believe what everyone has been saying though, that if the salary cap is gone for one year, it won't be back again. I don't think any of they players want it, and there is a large contingent of owners who don't want it--Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder, apparently Al Davis, etc.

I truly believe what everyone has been saying though, that if the salary cap is gone for one year, it won't be back again. I don't think any of they players want it, and there is a large contingent of owners who don't want it--Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder, apparently Al Davis, etc.

Large but I doubt overwhelming. That was just the NFLPA's trump card to pressure their modifications for the last extension. They said if it wasn't worked out before the capless 06-07 season they would never agree to a cap again. It was a threat. Would they actually do it? I don't know, but most owners would be against it, and I'd say media and public perception would be with the owners, particularly the collective fanbase and media amongst those teams that would be most adversely effected (and plenty from others who actually have a clue and appreciate fair competition and the NFL's world class cap system). I'm not really sure the NFLPA would make it an agenda for a new CBA honestly, it sounds like something they just can't win unless most owners agree (which, as said, I doubt. Even some with money wouldn't likely spend a lot of it so they'd still prefer a cap). I mean, the NFLPA has to yield on *some* thing, I think a cap is one of those things unless there is a shift in owner attitude.